Serge Frolov, «Evil-Merodach and the Deuteronomist: The Sociohistorical
Setting of Dtr in the Light of 2 Kgs 25,27-30», Vol. 88 (2007) 174-190
The article demonstrates that four concluding verses of the Former Prophets (2 Kgs 25,27-30) militate against the recent tendency to view Deuteronomism as a lasting phenomenon, especially against its extension into the late exilic and postexilic periods. Because Evil-Merodach proved an ephemeral and insignificant ruler, the account of Jehoiachin’s release and exaltation under his auspices could be reasonably expected to shore up the notion of an eternal Davidic dynasty only
as long as the Babylonian king remained on the throne (562-560 BCE). Since the dynastic promise to David and associated concepts rank high on Dtr’s agenda, it means that the Former Prophets was not updated along Deuteronomistic lines to
reflect the shift in the audience’s perspective on Evil-Merodach caused by his downfall. If so, there was no Deuteronomistic literary activity in the corpus after
560 BCE.
184 Serge Frolov
narrator is trying to say here that both routines continued as long as
Jehoiachin was alive, the verses must postdate his demise and, unless
he died very soon after his release and exaltation (which would be too
much of a coincidence, although even today it is by no means unusual
to pass away at fifty-five), Evil-Merodach’s fall as well (28). However,
the pattern of verbal forms in the fragment suggests that the sense of
both verses may be somewhat different. To begin with, v. 30 uses the
plain perfect verb hntn; such verbs commonly “represent actions, etc.,
which were already completed in the past, at the time when other
actions or conditions took place (pluperfect)†(29). The sentence is then
best understood, in juxtaposition with waw-consecutive imperfects in
v. 28 (rbdyw, ˆtyw), as referring to an antecedent action: “And his ration,
a permanent one, had been given to him on the king’s behalf all his
lifeâ€. In other words, v. 30 seems to assert, in agreement with extant
Neo-Babylonian documents, that Jehoiachin had been granted a
lifelong allowance even before his release and exaltation by Evil-
Merodach (30). Such a statement could, obviously, be made in
Jehoiachin’s lifetime.
In v. 29b, the perfect lka is preceded by a waw. Samuel Driver has
compellingly demonstrated that in many cases the temporal connota-
tion of this particular form can only be determined contextually; the
nature of the relationship between the two clauses that comprise the
verse is then of crucial importance (31). Contentwise, v. 29a would
properly belong after the account of Jehoiachin’s release in v. 27; by
reporting the removal of his prison garments after the mention of his
exalted throne in v. 28 the text suggests that the change had something
to do with his dining in Evil-Merodach’s presence. From the syntactic
point of view, by switching to a perfect form ançw after two waw-
consecutive imperfects in v. 28 the narrator detaches v. 29a from them,
implicitly lumping it with what follows. If so, v. 29b does not have to
be a self-contained note suggested by conventional translations of the
verse: “So Jehoiachin put off his prison garments. And every day of
his life he dined regularly at the king’s table†(RSV). Rather, the clause
(28) Thus, e.g., BEGG, “Significanceâ€, 53; MURRAY, “Jehoiachinâ€, 260.
(29) GKC § 106f. Cf. also A. NICCACCI, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical
Hebrew Prose (JSOTSS 86; Sheffield 1990) 30, 35-41, 52-54, 120-121, 180-181,
188.
(30) See n. 23 above.
(31) S.R. DRIVER, A Treatise on the Use of Tenses in Hebrew and Some Other
Syntactical Questions (The Biblical Resource Series; Grand Rapids – Cambridge
– Livonia 1998) 139-142.